We have entered the age of returns. This was the message emerging from the Unesco conference on the Return of Cultural Objects to their Countries of Origin held at the new Acropolis Museum in Athens in March.
Despite the continuing diplomatic deadlock over the Parthenon Marbles (which many delegates referred to as "the elephant in the room", since no paper addressed the issue directly), the evidence presented over the two days seemed to confirm that nothing short of a sea change is occurring in terms of global cross-cultural cooperation on cultural objects.
Delegates agreed that further progress on the issue of repatriation will depend on the following: respect for the human rights of others; willingness to enter into negotiations without preconditions; adherence to ethical standards in museum practice; compliance with new codes of practice for the antiquities trade; and the removal of legal impediments.
Recent examples of successful repatriation and reunification include: Italy's return to Ethiopia of the Axum Obelisk; the return from Germany to Zimbabwe of the Stone Bird of Great Zimbabwe; and the long-term loan by the British Museum of a ceremonial mask of the Kwakwaka'wakw First Nations to the U'mista Cultural Centre in British Columbia, Canada.
All of these cases illustrate the diverse humanitarian, cultural and educational benefits accruing to both the museum and the source nation as a result of repatriation.
They also draw attention to the curious diplomatic lexicon that has evolved over recent years in order to settle disputes. For example, without the ability to agree on a "permanent loan" - under normal circumstances something of a contradiction in terms - the case of the Zimbabwe birds might never have been settled.
Many of these problems and potential solutions were investigated in depth. Barrister Norman Palmer pressed home the distinctions between mediation and law and advised delegates not to let a four-letter word ("loan") impede progress towards a mediated solution.
And the conference was unanimous in applauding Andrea Sanborn, executive director of the U'mista Cultural Centre, for agreeing to the British Museum's precondition of a nine-year loan of the Kwakwaka'wakw First Nations mask as the basis for repatriation.
Whether requesting its return from British Columbia when the loan period expires will constitute an "appreciable impoverishment of the [Kwakwaka'wakw] national cultural heritage", as itemised under Article 5 of the Unesco Convention, remains to be seen.
Tristram Besterman, former director of Manchester Museum and now a museum consultant, spoke of the need for courage, goodwill, a leap of imagination, good communication and listening skills, and attention to language.
He reminded the conference that historically the balance of power has generally been in favour of the museum. "When returning, we are also repatriating authority, dignity and control to the source nation," he said.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, given the conference location, many delegates seemed determined to keep the most controversial and sensitive repatriation case of all in sharp focus.
However, with no single paper devoted to the marbles and perhaps aware of the conference temperature rising, Maurice Davies, deputy director of the UK Museums Association, departed from his prepared text to call for a fresh dialogue over the issue. He urged the British Museum and the New Acropolis Museum "to speak together as equals, to start with shared values, not differences".
The Athens conference offered another opportunity for enlightened heritage professionals to preach to the converted. Whether their warm words will translate into firm action over those issues that continue to confound progressive cultural thinking is a moot point.
Conspicuously absent were representatives of those whose interests conflict with the liberal consensus. Where was the antiquities trade? Where were the directors of the so-called "universal museums"?
For the time being, it seems the Parthenon Galleries of the New Acropolis Museum will open showing replicas of the London-held marbles interspersed with the authentic fragments still in Athens. This approach is being interpreted as a critical error of judgement that will effectively concede the disputed objects to the British Museum.
However, the alternative - to lament their continuing absence by highlighting the gaping lacunae in the new museum - seems equally unpalatable and suggests that the much-lauded age of returns might still be some way off.
Tom Flynn is a London-based writer
Despite the continuing diplomatic deadlock over the Parthenon Marbles (which many delegates referred to as "the elephant in the room", since no paper addressed the issue directly), the evidence presented over the two days seemed to confirm that nothing short of a sea change is occurring in terms of global cross-cultural cooperation on cultural objects.
Delegates agreed that further progress on the issue of repatriation will depend on the following: respect for the human rights of others; willingness to enter into negotiations without preconditions; adherence to ethical standards in museum practice; compliance with new codes of practice for the antiquities trade; and the removal of legal impediments.
Recent examples of successful repatriation and reunification include: Italy's return to Ethiopia of the Axum Obelisk; the return from Germany to Zimbabwe of the Stone Bird of Great Zimbabwe; and the long-term loan by the British Museum of a ceremonial mask of the Kwakwaka'wakw First Nations to the U'mista Cultural Centre in British Columbia, Canada.
All of these cases illustrate the diverse humanitarian, cultural and educational benefits accruing to both the museum and the source nation as a result of repatriation.
They also draw attention to the curious diplomatic lexicon that has evolved over recent years in order to settle disputes. For example, without the ability to agree on a "permanent loan" - under normal circumstances something of a contradiction in terms - the case of the Zimbabwe birds might never have been settled.
Many of these problems and potential solutions were investigated in depth. Barrister Norman Palmer pressed home the distinctions between mediation and law and advised delegates not to let a four-letter word ("loan") impede progress towards a mediated solution.
And the conference was unanimous in applauding Andrea Sanborn, executive director of the U'mista Cultural Centre, for agreeing to the British Museum's precondition of a nine-year loan of the Kwakwaka'wakw First Nations mask as the basis for repatriation.
Whether requesting its return from British Columbia when the loan period expires will constitute an "appreciable impoverishment of the [Kwakwaka'wakw] national cultural heritage", as itemised under Article 5 of the Unesco Convention, remains to be seen.
Tristram Besterman, former director of Manchester Museum and now a museum consultant, spoke of the need for courage, goodwill, a leap of imagination, good communication and listening skills, and attention to language.
He reminded the conference that historically the balance of power has generally been in favour of the museum. "When returning, we are also repatriating authority, dignity and control to the source nation," he said.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, given the conference location, many delegates seemed determined to keep the most controversial and sensitive repatriation case of all in sharp focus.
However, with no single paper devoted to the marbles and perhaps aware of the conference temperature rising, Maurice Davies, deputy director of the UK Museums Association, departed from his prepared text to call for a fresh dialogue over the issue. He urged the British Museum and the New Acropolis Museum "to speak together as equals, to start with shared values, not differences".
The Athens conference offered another opportunity for enlightened heritage professionals to preach to the converted. Whether their warm words will translate into firm action over those issues that continue to confound progressive cultural thinking is a moot point.
Conspicuously absent were representatives of those whose interests conflict with the liberal consensus. Where was the antiquities trade? Where were the directors of the so-called "universal museums"?
For the time being, it seems the Parthenon Galleries of the New Acropolis Museum will open showing replicas of the London-held marbles interspersed with the authentic fragments still in Athens. This approach is being interpreted as a critical error of judgement that will effectively concede the disputed objects to the British Museum.
However, the alternative - to lament their continuing absence by highlighting the gaping lacunae in the new museum - seems equally unpalatable and suggests that the much-lauded age of returns might still be some way off.
Tom Flynn is a London-based writer
